If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Reply to Thread

Your Message

Please correctly re-type the phrase f o o t d o c t o r in the form box. Re-type it without the extra spaces and put the one space where it should be. We apologize for having to do this but this silliness helps slow the spammers.

Title:

Additional Options

Additional Options:

Automatically parse links in text

HTML

HTML

Topic Review (Newest First)

11-04-2008, 12:44 PM

Allen S

10 years and 89K miles (nt)

11-04-2008, 08:51 AM

M3ed

This one 3 years, the old one, 2 years.

11-03-2008, 03:14 PM

borderm3

8 Years

11-02-2008, 08:36 PM

HSV-DAN

Re: Negative 4 hours. I am now M3-less.

Come back and visit once in a while. We still get a post every week or so...

11-02-2008, 04:13 PM

DanC325is

Re: How do you like this one compared to your '95?

Ultimately, I liked the 1996 better than the 1995. Surprisingly, most of the reason was because my 1996 was a luxury package, and the seats are far more functional. If the vader seats were as good as they looked, they'd be one hell of a seat. Sadly, they do not adjust as far back or as far down to the floor pan as the luxury seats, nor do they have "functional headrests". Without a helmet, vader headrests do give you anything to lean back on. I was a vader seat "fan boy" before I owned a car with them.

Other differences..... My 1995 had occasionally ticky hydraulic lifters. Sometimes one or two would be loud and make the otherwise well running 3.0 liter sound like a sewing machine. Kind of embarrassing while going through a drive-thru. My 3.2 never did that. Ever.

The 1995 was better in that it set far less engine fault codes (not nearly as many codes to trip, particularly emissions related). Half as many oxygen sensors, and excemption from the "plug in" OBD2 emissions test.

I like that the 1996 M3 had "i-bus" CD changer wiring, which allowed my BMW CD43 in-dash CD player control the CD changer.

Performance wise, they were both equal footing. The 1995 didn't have as much around-town low-end that the 3.2 has, but the "peakier" power delivery made it feel a little more exciting to drive in the revs. I actually kind of preferred the flatter power delivery curve of the 3.2, but they both were incredibly fun in either flavor.

The staggered wheels of the 1996+ cars is a blessing and a curse. I liked the more neutral handling of the non-staggered 17x7.5's with 235/40-17 tires, but I did like having the larger 17x8.5 wheels on the rear. The best factory wheel setup on any year M3 is to use four of the 17x8.5 rear wheels, with 245/40-17's front and rear. Then you're rotatable, have more traction, and more neutral handling. (I did this with my 330i which also had the same sized staggered setup -- just but a second set of staggereds, and make a set of 17x7.5 for the winter, and 17x8.5 for summer... perfect!).

My advise to anyone deciding between a 1995 or 1996+ E36 M3 is to buy the car you like best. Whether it's based on the color combination, service records, or the test drive. I would not discriminate against either OBD1 or OBD2 version M3, and would gladly buy another 1995 M3..... especially if it had the luxury seats. ;-)

How well is yours doing with that many miles? What year is it? I've got a 95 with 153k and have to use it as a daily driver since the dear ran out in front of my e28 which has over 205k. I've made a recent post concerning an oil leak and was wondering if you could give me some common problems to look for on the S50 and e36 in general. I've just recently replaced the headliner myself and will soon start on the doors. The vinyl and plastic pieces don't seem to hold up as well as on the e28, but I'm getting great mileage. Just wish I'd kept the 528e instead of keeping the 535is which gets lousy mileage for the driving I do.